NASA's FY 2014 Annual Performance Report and FY 2016 Annual

236 Pages·2015·7.37 MB·English

Introduction
Introduction

Introduction

The FY 2014 Annual Performance Report and FY 2016 Annual Performance Plan1 is a companion to NASA’s
FY 2016 Congressional Justification. It builds upon the framework laid in the Agency’s 2014 Strategic Plan, which
in accordance with the requirements of the Government Performance and Results Act Modernization Act of 2010,
P.L. 111-352, provides a robust framework for NASA’s performance planning and reporting activities covering the
2014-2018 timeframe.

This document integrates reporting of NASA’s prior year performance with its updated performance plan for the
current fiscal year, as well as its proposed performance plan for the requested budget fiscal year. Together, this
holistic approach provides a retrospective and prospective view of NASA’s performance. The document is
organized into the following sections:
 Part 1—Performance Management at NASA summarizes how the Agency is organized, governed, and
managed. It explains NASA as an organization and its approach to performance management, strategic
planning, and performance reporting, as well as how the Agency uses data, evidence, evaluations, and
reporting to manage performance. It concludes with a high-level summary of performance for FY 2014.
 Part 2—Performance Priorities and Management Challenges describes how NASA prioritizes select
performance objectives, in response to both federal and internal Agency mandates. Examples include
NASA’s approach to the recently established Strategic Review process, NASA’s FY 2014–FY 2015 agency
priority goals, and NASA’s contributions to the FY 2014–FY 2017 cross-agency priority goals. It concludes
by describing how NASA leverages internal reviews to address various management challenges and
includes a discussion of NASA’s response to the management challenges recently identified by NASA’s
Office of Inspector General (full response published in NASA’s FY 2014 Agency Financial Report).
 Part 3—Performance Reporting and Planning presents NASA’s combined Annual Performance Report and
Annual Performance Plan, organized by strategic goal and strategic objective. It shows up to six years of
historical performance alongside two years of future performance. This presentation provides a unique
opportunity to see performance trends across multiple years within a program, as well as the linkages
between multiyear performance goals and their annual components and how these performance
measures support the strategic objectives. In addition, for the first time, this section incorporates a
summary of the annual Strategic Review by strategic objective and budget information for each strategic
objective.
 Part 4—Supporting Information comprises all of the supplemental information, including a list identifying
the changes made to the updated FY 2015 Annual Performance Plan and captions and credits for the
images used in Parts 2 and 3.

The FY 2014 Annual Performance Report and FY 2016 Annual Performance Plan captures the full spectrum of
NASA’s activities to accomplish national priorities in civil aeronautics research, space exploration, science, and
advanced research and development.

1 The FY 2014 !nnual Performance Report and FY 2016 !nnual Performance Plan is produced by N!S!’s Office of the hief Financial Officer
with contractor support provided by The Tauri Group.
FY 2014 Annual Performance Report and FY 2016 Annual Performance Plan 1
Introduction

Table of Contents

Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1

PART 1 ............................................................................................................................... 4

A Performance-Based Organization ................................................................................... 5

NASA Vision and Mission, 5

Organizational Structure, 5

Governance and Strategic Management ............................................................................ 8

Governance, 8

Strategic Management, 11

Performance Management .............................................................................................. 13

Performance Planning and Assessments, 14

Performance Assessments, 14

Using Evidence, Evaluation, and Research to Set Strategies and Measure Progress ........ 15

Internal Reviews, 15

External Reviews and Assessments, 16

FY 2014 Annual Performance Report and FY 2016 Annual Performance Plan .................. 16

Assessment Rating Scales and Success Criteria, 16

Summary of FY 2014 Performance, 17

PART 2 ............................................................................................................................. 21

Performance Priorities ..................................................................................................... 22

Strategic Reviews, 22

Agency Priority Goals, 23

Cross-Agency Priority Goals, 29

Management Challenges ................................................................................................. 40

Response to OIG Management Challenges, 42

PART 3 ............................................................................................................................. 43

Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 44

How to Read the Strategic Objective Information, 45

How to Read the Performance Goal and Annual Performance Indicator Information, 46

Strategic Goal 1 ................................................................................................................ 47

Strategic Objective 1.1, 50

Strategic Objective 1.2, 59

Strategic Objective 1.3, 70

FY 2014 Annual Performance Report and FY 2016 Annual Performance Plan 2
Introduction
Strategic Objective 1.4, 76

Strategic Objective 1.5, 87

Strategic Objective 1.6, 102

Strategic Objective 1.7, 113

Strategic Goal 2 .............................................................................................................. 124

Strategic Objective 2.1, 127

Strategic Objective 2.2, 142

Strategic Objective 2.3, 160

Strategic Objective 2.4, 166

Strategic Goal 3 .............................................................................................................. 174

Strategic Objective 3.1, 177

Strategic Objective 3.2, 195

Strategic Objective 3.3, 206

Strategic Objective 3.4, 219

PART 4 ........................................................................................................................... 225

Changes to the FY 2015 Performance Plan .................................................................... 226

Image Captions and Credits ........................................................................................... 231

FY 2014 Annual Performance Report and FY 2016 Annual Performance Plan 3

Part 1—Performance Management at NASA

This section summarizes NASA as an organization and its approach to performance management, strategic
planning, and performance reporting. It also explains how the Agency is organized, governed, and managed, and
how it uses data, evaluations, and reporting to manage performance. Two additional sections describe NASA’s
priorities and challenges, its reported performance for FY 2014, and its performance measures for FY 2015 and
FY 2016.

A Performance-Based Organization

NASA is a performance-based organization, as defined and described by the Office of Management and Budget’s
Circular A-11. A performance-based organization commits to manage towards specific, measurable goals derived
from a defined mission, using performance data to continually improve operations. The concept of a
performance-based organization was codified in the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993
and updated in the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010. As a performance-based organization, NASA is dedicated to
results-driven management focused on optimizing value to the American public. NASA sets concrete goals and
holds itself accountable to those goals through a transparent framework of how to measure progress.

NASA Vision and Mission

NASA’s Vision and Mission are defined collaboratively through internal and external stakeholder input. NASA last
revised these Vision and Mission statements in the 2014 Strategic Plan.

NASA’s Vision is:

We reach for new heights and reveal the unknown for the benefit of humankind.

NASA’s Mission is to:

Drive advances in science, technology, aeronautics, and space exploration to enhance knowledge,
education, innovation, economic vitality, and stewardship of Earth.

Organizational Structure

NASA’s organizational structure is designed to accomplish its Mission through sound business, management, and
safety oversight. Under the leadership of the Administrator, NASA offices at Headquarters in Washington, DC,
guide and direct the Agency. The Office of the Administrator provides top-level strategy and direction for the
Agency. The Administrator and his staff give programmatic direction for NASA’s missions and guide the operations
of the Centers. NASA’s Centers and facilities execute the mission work—engineering, operations, science,
technology development—and supporting activities. Figure 1 depicts NASA’s organizational structure, current as
of February 2015.

FY 2014 Annual Performance Report and FY 2016 Annual Performance Plan 5
Part 1—Performance Management at NASA
Figure 1: NASA’s Organization

NASA Policy Directive 1000.3D, “The N!S! Organization,” establishes components that have unique portfolios,
budget oversight, and performance management responsibilities in executing the Mission:

 The Science Mission Directorate (SMD) manages the Agency’s science portfolio and focuses on
programmatic work on Earth, planetary, astrophysics, and heliophysics research. SMD engages the U.S.
science community, sponsors scientific research, and develops and deploys satellites and probes in
collaboration with NASA’s international partners and other agencies (through the Joint Agency Satellite
Division) to answer fundamental scientific questions and expand understanding of space. Additional
information on SMD is available at http://science.nasa.gov/.
 The Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) manages the Agency’s aeronautics research
portfolio, which enables technology innovation and development allowing the U.S. aviation industry to
continue to grow and maintain global competitiveness. Research programs conduct cutting-edge research
at both the fundamental and integrated systems levels to address national and global challenges. ARMD
guides its research efforts using a strategic vision that embraces the multiple roles of aviation and
expands the understanding of those roles to the global stage, while working to address tomorrow’s
challenges. Additional information on ARMD is available at http://www.aeronautics.nasa.gov/.
 The Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) manages the space technology portfolio, which also
funds the crosscutting activities of the Office of the Chief Technologist. STMD pioneers new technologies
and capabilities needed by the Agency and commercial sector. It develops technologies that support the
broader space economy and other government missions in space and complements technology
development in NASA’s other mission directorates, delivering solutions to NASA’s technology needs for
future science and exploration missions. Additional information on STMD is available at
http://www.nasa.gov/directorates/spacetech/home/index.html. Additional information on the Office of
the Chief Technologist is available at http://www.nasa.gov/offices/oct/home/index.html.
FY 2014 Annual Performance Report and FY 2016 Annual Performance Plan 6
Part 1—Performance Management at NASA
 The Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD) manages the exploration and
space operations portfolio. HEOMD manages development of the Space Launch System (SLS), the Orion
spacecraft, and future exploration technologies. It works with U.S. space industry partners to develop
commercial systems for providing crew and cargo transportation services to and from low Earth orbit.
HEOMD also manages operations and research for the International Space Station (ISS), and
communications systems and networks that enable deep space and near-Earth exploration. Additional
information on HEOMD is available at http://www.nasa.gov/directorates/heo/home/index.html.
 The Mission Support Directorate (MSD) supports all NASA missions in a crosscutting manner. For
example, MSD manages the Safety, Security, and Mission Services and Construction and Environmental
Compliance and Restoration accounts, in addition to functions such as procurement and financial
management, which cut across all mission directorates. These accounts fund operations at Headquarters
and the Centers, as well as the institutional and programmatic construction of facilities. MSD reports
progress on major national initiatives to the Administrator and other senior Agency officials, provides
independent reviews and investigations, and liaises with the public and other federal agencies. MSD is
based at Headquarters but has representatives at the Centers to provide coordination and control.
Additional information on MSD is available at http://msd.hq.nasa.gov/.
 The Office of Education (Education) develops and manages a portfolio of educational programs for
students and teachers at all levels. The office seeks to develop a vibrant pool of individuals for the future
workforce that will provide sustainable support of national and NASA missions by attracting and retaining
students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics disciplines. To achieve these goals,
Education works in partnership with other government agencies, nonprofit organizations, museums, and
the education community at large. Additional information on the Office of Education is available at
http://www.nasa.gov/offices/education/about/.
 The Administrator’s Staff Offices support the Administrator’s responsibilities by providing a range of high-
level guidance and support in critical areas like safety and mission assurance, technology planning, equal
opportunity, information technology, financial administration, small business administration,
international relations, and legislative and intergovernmental affairs. Additional information on the
Administrator’s Staff Offices is available at http://www.nasa.gov/about/org_index.html.
 The Office of Inspector General (OIG) conducts audits, reviews, and investigations of NASA programs to
prevent and detect fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement and to assist NASA management in
promoting economy, efficiency, and effectiveness. Additional information on the Office of Inspector
General is available at http://oig.nasa.gov/.

A dedicated workforce transforms NASA’s Mission into reality. NASA employs about 17,700 civil servants at
Headquarters in Washington, DC, its Centers, and other facilities across the country. NASA staffs each location
with a contractor workforce for technical and business operations support. Figure 2 shows the distribution of
NASA’s Centers and major facilities. NASA also has many other facilities throughout the country and around the
world.

FY 2014 Annual Performance Report and FY 2016 Annual Performance Plan 7
Part 1—Performance Management at NASA
Figure 2: NASA Centers and Facilities Nationwide

Governance and Strategic Management

Governance

Effective Agency governance is critical to mission success and delivering on the Agency’s commitment to good
stewardship of taxpayer resources. Governance is the way decisions are made and the foundation on which NASA
is managed and it requires consistent management and cohesive policies, guidance, and processes.

NASA governs with three Agency-level councils, each with distinct charters and responsibilities. Councils evaluate
issues and support decision authorities when topics require high levels of integration, visibility, and approval.
Councils are used to provide high-level oversight, set requirements and strategic priorities, and guide key
assessments of the Agency. Each council has a unique focus. The three councils are the Executive Council (EC), the
Program Management Council (PMC), and the Mission Support Council (MSC). The EC focuses on major Agency-
wide decisions, the MSC on mission-enabling decisions, and the PMC on program and mission decisions, with
FY 2014 Annual Performance Report and FY 2016 Annual Performance Plan 8
Part 1—Performance Management at NASA
emphasis on managing performance as programs reach Key Decision Points. Regardless of organizational position,
senior managers are accountable to the appropriate council chair with respect to topics addressed by that council.

NASA’s governance policy ensures that leadership approaches strategic management decisions with rigor and
reliable data. As shown in Figure 3, the governance councils affect all phases of the performance management
cycle.

Figure 3: Functional Relationships Between NASA’s Governing Councils

In addition to the governing councils, the Senior Management Council (SMC) is a body of NASA senior leadership
that provides advice and counsel to the EC on key issues of the Agency, provides input on the formulation of
Agency strategy, and when delegated by the EC, serves as the Agency senior decision-making body on specific
topics of strategic direction and planning. Examples of long-term strategic planning processes include the Strategy
Implementation Planning process, strategic acquisition, NASA Strategic Plan development, scenario planning, and
portfolio analysis.

The Strategic Implementation Plan process promotes long-term strategy discussions across the Agency. This
integrated Agency-level activity transforms high-level Agency strategy into guidance for implementing NASA’s
portfolio and budget planning. It effectively brings together the relevant NASA representatives from the mission
directorates, Centers, and key Headquarters offices to discuss programmatic and pervasive issues that require
long-term planning. The process includes meetings chaired by the NASA Administrator to provide an early view of
potential major acquisitions. During these meetings, the Administrator provides guidance to senior leaders to
ensure any new Agency and Administration initiatives are appropriate, current portfolio risk and implications to
the future portfolio are understood, and strategic and operational aspects for placement of work in-house versus
out-of-house are part of a high-level make or buy strategy.

FY 2014 Annual Performance Report and FY 2016 Annual Performance Plan 9